Multi-Institutional Validation of the Predictive Power of the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI) for HCT Outcomes
Multi-Institutional Validation of the Predictive Power of the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI) for HCT Outcomes
复制标题
造血细胞移植合并症指数 (HCT-CI) 对 HCT 结果的预测能力的多机构验证
DOI:
10.1182/blood.v118.21.145.145
复制
发表时间:
2011
期刊:
影响因子:
20.3
通讯作者:
B. Storer
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
M. Sorror;F. Ostronoff;R. Storb;S. Bhatia;R. Maziarz;M. Pulsipher;M. Maris;H. Deeg;P. Martin;F. Appelbaum;D. Maloney;B. Sandmaier;B. Storer
Abstract 145 In 2005, the HCT-CI was introduced as a weighted scoring system to predict mortality risk following allogeneic HCT. Since then, not all investigators were able to validate the HCT-CI after testing in their respective institutions. In 2007, a collaborative multi-institutional study was initiated to investigate 1) whether the HCT-CI was predictive of outcomes across different institutions, 2) the degree of homogeneity of outcome prediction, and 3) the reasons for lack of agreement among investigators. To this end, data were collected from 3347 consecutive patients (pts) treated with allogeneic HCT between 2000 and 2006 from HLA-matched related or unrelated donors at 5 institutions. All data were collected by a single investigator, blinded from the final outcomes of pts, to ensure consistent comorbidity coding. Numbers of pts, percentages of available comorbidity data, and other transplant and pt characteristics were statistically significantly different among institutions (Table 1). Pts missing comorbidity or other covariate data were excluded from further analyses, yielding a final sample size of 2523. Overall, pts with HCT-CI scores of 0 vs. 1–2 vs. ≥3 had 2-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) rates of 14%, 23%, and 39% ( p p p =0.03) and ≥3 ( p =0.04) for NRM and with scores ≥3 ( p =0.01) for OS but not with scores 1–2 for OS ( p =0.18). We also found a statistically significant, independent impact of institution on NRM (p=0.001) and OS (p We then assessed, among 80 pts from institution A, the inter-observer variability in scoring comorbidity between two individual investigators and between each of them and unknown individuals from a pool of other evaluators. Weighted kappa statistics were highest (0.59) between two single evaluators and lowest between each and multiple evaluators (0.43 and 0.55, respectively). The principal investigator then developed a comprehensive guideline to code comorbidities and used it to train the other single investigator in a single session. Additional evaluation of inter-observer agreement demonstrated marked improvement of the weighted kappa statistic to 0.78. The reported disagreements on the validity of the HCT-CI may be explained by different institutional experiences in managing transplant pts, small number of pts at some institutions, and inter-observer variability in score assignment. The HCT-CI is valid to discriminate relative risks of mortalities after HCT across different institutions and should be used regularly for counseling pts and clinical trial design. Efforts to improve methods for coding comorbidity are in progress. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.